Re: your mail Re: on anonymity, identity, reputation, and spoofing
From: m5@vail.tivoli.com (Mike McNally) D. Owen Rowley writes:
Personally I think that accountability is going to be required as the price for reasonably secure encryption, reasonably open access, and reasonably secure privacy of data. IMNSHO, it is unreasonable to expect an anarcho-libertarian outcome to these issues. If you can prove me wrong I will be thrilled.
By whom is accountability going to be required? How will it (or how can it) be implemented? What sort of mechanisms can be expected to reliably and universally evolve in the decentralized anarchic network we know today that will make "paying the price" a meaningful concept? I con't prove you wrong because I cannot understand what you predict.
The comercial use of internet is growing at a very fast rate, and it is predicted to overtake other uses in scope eventually. wide scale networks provide capabilitys which are very attractive to a variety of business enterprises. I suspect that a first pass will be made to try and use internet and the current suite of protocols and services as they are now. I also suspect that such attempts will flush out a whole raft of problems and deficiencies along with those who exploit such things. Hopefully new protocols and services can be developed which will minimise vulnerability and maximise protection for bussiness assets while allowing us as much freedom as possible. Nobody really knows what those things will be, and it is sorta problematic to make public laundrey lists of vulnerabilitys without some sort of idea how to deal with cleaning up the mess. We are going to have to learn by example. My main point though is that eventually business will find decentralised anarchic networks to be hostile territory, and will move on to less vulnerable, more reliable networks where user authentication, and accountable security are provided. It may be that there will be barriers between the anarchic networks and the business-place networks,that require users to provide proof of identity before they can pass.
It seems to me that multimedia extensions have an *unfolding of the lotus like effect upon the issues involved.
Explain: is it because of the medium itself or because of the nature of information that'll be available with multimedia delivery systems?
yes. :-) seriously.. note that you asked "because of the medium itself". It's multiMedia, thats jargon for multiple mediums interacting with each other, and presenting data interactively on multiple fronts. It means an unfolding from two dimensional thinking ( text) to three dimensional thinking ( virtual reality ).
I also see very little regarding potential for breaking the mind machine link, or biologic interfaces?
Uhhhh, OK.
perhaps you are unaware of some of the more starling things that are being done with biofeedback interfaces. but even more simply than that.. lets take something mundane and achievable like hand gestures sensed by the data-glove. you want to get a privileged message to a colleague. If you can both access a data-space in real time and view an interactive simulation of each other in a prileged manner that insures no one else can capture and render either view, all you need to do is communicate via ASL or even a proprietary sign language, via the dataglove interface. this is very doable.. right now. let the Intelligence analysts chew on that! BTW, that scenario was suggested to me by an individual of my aquaintance who lives on the other side of the --uh-- tracks. he was very keen to be able to have such privileged communication, and cost is no factor to him, he pays in cash. (I should point out that I turned down the offer to contract the application) we are about to enter into an era of computing that provides quite a bit of potential to evade surveilance just because of the sheer multitude of possibilities. This is what is really driving those who want to do surveilance mad. Don't be surprsed if the ultimate result is draconian restriction in order to reduce the odds that are currently in our favor. Don't be surprised if you see your decentralised anarchic net go away and never return. LUX ./. owen
D. Owen Rowley writes:
The comercial use of internet is growing at a very fast rate...
Agreed.
wide scale networks provide capabilitys which are very attractive to a variety of business enterprises.
Clearly; *right now* businesses are spending real money on it.
I suspect that a first pass will be made to try and use internet and the current suite of protocols and services as they are now.
Uhhh, it's already happening.
I also suspect that such attempts will flush out a whole raft of problems and deficiencies along with those who exploit such things. Hopefully new protocols and services can be developed which will minimise vulnerability and maximise protection for bussiness assets while allowing us as much freedom as possible.
Why does this preclude continuation of net services as they exist today? You seem to feel that there can only be one mode of use for network resources. If businesses want to use the net only under the aegis of some authentication/credentialing scheme, fine! That means I may or may not choose too participate, or that I may choose to participate as "myself" while still maintaining other digital alter-egos for other purposes.
Nobody really knows what those things will be, and it is sorta problematic to make public laundrey lists of vulnerabilitys without some sort of idea how to deal with cleaning up the mess. We are going to have to learn by example.
Why are you so stuck on the idea of "cleaning up a mess"? The network is a resource. It can be used concurrently in lots of different ways. You're free to start up your own set of authenticated services this afternoon if you like.
My main point though is that eventually business will find decentralised anarchic networks to be hostile territory, and will move on to less vulnerable, more reliable networks where user authentication, and accountable security are provided.
Really? So the presence of paying customers on the anarchic networks won't be attractive? We've had experience with lots of nasty problems on the Internet already, and yet companies are all the time paying for things like T1 channels for better service. Of course, businesses are free as they've always been to implement whatever communications systems they want. This is old news.
It may be that there will be barriers between the anarchic networks and the business-place networks,that require users to provide proof of identity before they can pass.
Ok, fine. So I pass if I want to and not if I don't. What's the point? What does this have to do with being able to interact on other net forums under different rules?
seriously.. note that you asked "because of the medium itself". It's multiMedia, thats jargon for multiple mediums interacting with each other, and presenting data interactively on multiple fronts.
Yes, I'm vaguely familiar with the concept :-)
It means an unfolding from two dimensional thinking ( text) to three dimensional thinking ( virtual reality ).
I think you're selling text short, but that's another discussion.
perhaps you are unaware of some of the more starling things that are being done with biofeedback interfaces.
I'm aware of plenty of hype and pipe-dreams, but little reality. Sure, it'd be neat though. What does it have to do with authentication and accountability?
lets take something mundane and achievable like hand gestures sensed by the data-glove... [data glove communication deleted]
That'd be nice, I guess, but what's the point? Are you suggesting that someone tapping the communication line wouldn't be able to (1) figure out what you were "saying" and (2) spoof the system? (If neither, then what does this technology have to do with authentication?)
BTW, that scenario was suggested to me by an individual of my aquaintance who lives on the other side of the --uh-- tracks. he was very keen to be able to have such privileged communication, and cost is no factor to him, he pays in cash.
Have you sent him PGP? Seems a heck of a lot better and a heck of a lot easier to implement.
Don't be surprised...
I'm losing track of what this has to do with "need" for accountability. -- Mike McNally
participants (2)
-
m5@vail.tivoli.com -
owen@autodesk.com